Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:44 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:51 am
Posts: 636
I think we are all just jonesing for some deep snow to prove our points. This discussion has gone awry. Fucking mathematical equations about snowboarding? Get outta here.

If all surfers were concerned about was float, then they'd all still be on 15foot longboards. But they're not, wonder why.

I'm out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:01 pm
Posts: 794
Location: Colorado
shredgnar wrote:
I think we are all just jonesing for some deep snow to prove our points.
Soo true! Last October people were hatin on everything, then when the snow started to fall, all the threads turned to TR's, props and smiley emoticons...

:bananas: :thumpsup: :headbang: :clap: :D :band: :band: :band: :soapbox:

_________________
Talking about snowboarding is like dancing about architecture...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1504
Location: Colorado
ShredLife wrote:
i'm just gonna say this: ride whatever the fuck you want to.

if you want to ride 170+ you are in the minority of all snowboarders - backcountry and front - and not all companies are going to make boards for you.

you should take a long look at what you've been posting and your attitude towards this sport. splitboarding was not created as an outlet for snowboarders to act pretentious, and quite frankly you've never seen me ride powder just like i've never seen you.

i don't have any problems riding powder with my setup. never have. if i rode a 185 sure it'd be really really easy to stay on top.... but it would just suck to turn, suck to control in the air, more weight for skinning...

i just think the level of condescension by some members on this site is appalling. if you came with that retarded attitude in the skintrack or up on a mountain somewhere i'd just laugh in your face but here you have new riders that are coming here for advice. this stance of 'these are the physics, so this is always right' is ridiculous. yes, a longer board stays up easier - that is only part of the story.



...... if all you can do is half cabs off of a cornice then you are intermediate yourself or you're just old and scared.

hows that feel?


Yes, I am certainly in the minority of all snowboarders (all splitboarders are), and I have no desire to ride like the majority of snowboarders. I am truly sorry if you find my statements condescending, as that is not my intention. As I stated, you should ride what you prefer-again my point was to explain how float works to one's advantage in making turning easier.

I am not an intermediate rider:

1st descent, Mt Columbia, Canadian Rockies
1st descent, Inverse Skyladder, St Elias Mountains, Alaska
1st descent, Mt Bona 16,500', St. Elias Mountains, Alaska

I find your use of offensive language and terminology, as well as personal attacks, juvenile, perhaps you are just a child who knows no better, as this is a distinct possibility I will not concern myself with you any longer.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 7:01 pm
Posts: 3
Thank god its about to snow and you can all go shred and not argue about pointless crap.

Has K2 been making this bamboo core thing for a while? anyone ever ridden it on a solid?
I had a bamboo arbor solid and it was good for the first part of the season but lost its 'pop' after a while and the second season it was not worth riding. The bamboo has made me not really consider the K2 and while I'd really like a prior I'm probably going to go with a voile because of a really good pricepoint on a full package.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 6:39 pm
Posts: 15
Never argue with a man in hardboots on a long board. You might die of Math. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:43 pm
Posts: 869
You guys need to tuffen up. You dork out on a splitboard website that's what you do, it's fun and if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. No ones shoving a 171 up your ass there giving you a different perspective and backing it up with some "math". So what there smarter than you, who gives a shit. Don't talk about throwing three's and jibbing backcountry on a split, post some video anyone can claim shit, and stop talking shit on hardbooters it's not like where trading in our sk8s for roller blades.

Go back to the original topic and it was about constructively criticizing K2 for maxing out @ 168. All you guys talk about how the more companies that get into the game the better. Bull shit. Every new company that's got in the game over the last three years has done nothing to better the art. In fact they all make there shit in China or Tunisia. The price has gone up not down, the quality control has gone to shit, and there boards are full of gimmicks like inner magna and putting a hole in you board so you can have your dam skin clip but be limited to only buying there skins when theres three different skins out there for splitters all with a skin clip. You all want to hold the nuts of these new companies but you do no good for them. You need to constructively criticize and if there going to wait to get into the game till now you should hold them to a higher standard especially when there as big a company as K2.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 7:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:51 am
Posts: 636
Yeah, right back on track...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:24 pm
Posts: 262
Location: Salzburg / Austria
UTAH wrote:
...putting a hole in you board so you can have your dam skin clip but be limited to only buying there skins when theres three different skins out there for splitters all with a skin clip.
Why shouldn't you be able to use (e.g.) Voile skins on the K2 splitboard?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: K2 Panoramic splitboard 2011/2012
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 12:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:57 am
Posts: 1110
Location: Santa Barbara, CA/Ashland, OR
sdmarkus wrote:
168 is about the smallest board I ride these days and I'm often disappointed when I see vendors aren't making bigger sticks. Then again, I'm 6'5" 250# and like to ride like a bat out of hell :listen: :doobie:

For me a longer board provides more float in the pow and stability at high speeds, I don't have a problem riding trees... :mrgreen:


I can attest to this. Can't wait to slay the knome zone this season! I've been jonesing alot recently, and it's June I keep thinking about :drool:

I find the guy calling people out for not spinning "even a 3" in the backcountry and being old very very amusing.

:lol:

I also think it's funny that this thread is called "K2 Panoramic Splitboard 2011/2012". As though that has anything to do with board length.

LOL!!!

_________________
"Winter is not a season, it's an occupation."
-Sinclair Lewis


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Float - Length vs width vs rocker vs camber...
PostPosted: Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 10:57 pm
Posts: 4938
Location: California
The K2 thread got a little off track so I thought I'd test my moderator skills and pull the posts into this thread.

Feel free to discuss float, length, rocker, math...etc :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Float - Length vs width vs rocker vs camber...
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 10:32 am
Posts: 556
Location: Rawesome, BC
Long boards truck, short boards suck....



:wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Float - Length vs width vs rocker vs camber...
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:44 am
Posts: 46
Some of the lengths posted here seem ridiculously long to me. I am 6'2", 205lbs and ride a 166 Storm R for my solid (and occasionally my 159 Custom X) and a 166 Split Decision for BC (although I am about to get a 165/27 Zephyr split from Venture). I have ridden chest deep pow at WC and Silverton on both the solid boards with no issues with floatation, as well as knee to waist deep on my split. 166 is about as long as I would want to go, especially in the tress I ride. Maybe would go up to 170 or larger in a big wide open face, but then I'd be hauling so much ass I wouldnt need that large of a board anyways.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Float - Length vs width vs rocker vs camber...
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:01 pm
Posts: 30
Location: SoCal
Did somebody say math?

What we're talking about essentially is the coefficient of lift. From my perspective, a snowboard sliding down a hill is a lot a wing flying through the air, or a surfboard planing in the water. Obviously, there are differences but I think as a first approximation is a good starting point for discussing the variables touched on here: lift (L), velocity (v), area (A).

L = p/2*v^2*A*C

So basically, lift varies with the square of the velocity, and linearly with the area (therefore length) of the board.

In the above, C is the coefficient dependent on the angle of attack of the wing and some other physical constants, and p is the density of the medium the wing is flying through.

What I would derive from this is that area (and therefore length) is important, but not as important as speed. I'm going to get a lot more lift out of riding 5% faster than I am from riding a 5% longer board. If I'm more comfortable riding a long board, then that's the best of both worlds - I'll get tons of lift. If I'm not comfortable with a longer board (shame on me, I know), then I'm better off riding a shorter board faster.

As always, for more info the wikipedia is awesome:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_%28force%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_coefficient

Now, this is a first approximation, there are probably a whole ton of very subtle fluid dynamic arguments regarding angle of attack, turbulence, drag, blah blah blah. But I would say this is a very good guide for this argument.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  





Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group